Dover-Foxcroft residents fought to keep their dam, then changed their minds

By Kasey Turman, Bangor Daily News Staff

DOVER-FOXCROFT — When Eli Towne was the first permanent settler in Dover in 1803, the Piscataquis River flowed freely through town. Now, more than 220 years later, the river is set to flow freely again.

But Neil Mallett, a Dover-Foxcroft resident who claims to be Towne’s distant relative, thinks it shouldn’t.

“The dam is part of the town,” Mallett said. “When you come to Dover and look up that river, that’s a beautiful thing.”

The Mayo Mill Dam has been a feature of the town since the 1800s when it was first made out of wood. It was converted to concrete in 1920, and most recently replaced in 1980. The Piscataquis River flows over the dam before dipping below a bridge in Dover-Foxcroft, a scene that multiple residents said completes the town’s picturesque downtown. 

That emotional connection to the dam is partly what motivated voters to keep the dam in a 2024 vote in a 557-441 decision. 

But a year later, those same voters denied the needed $9 million in retention and repairs in a 659-297 vote. 

The stunning reversal earlier in the month marks an end to the two years the town has spent considering the dam’s fate, as the recent vote means it is now slated for removal in the coming years. Locals also hope the decision will bring an end to a debate that has divided public opinion. 

The Bangor Daily News on Tuesday spoke with residents about their feelings toward the dam and how they cast their votes. Two voted to keep the dam in both elections, and three said they voted to keep the dam in the first election but later voted not to because of the increased taxes. Four residents said the election was too contentious to speak about it on record. 

The town has been divided because of the vote and has continued to be split, something Alsina Brenenstuhl, Dover-Foxcroft’s town manager, said needs to be squashed before moving forward.

“We need to take a step back, now that decisions are made, and come back as a community, because this is not who we are,” she said. “We need to remember that we’re neighbors and we have to live together regardless of however the outcome would have been.”

Leaving the dam as it is was not an option, according to a town review committee.

The dam was obtained by the town after a mill closure in 2007 and it hasn’t complied with federal regulations for over a decade. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission cited multiple structural deficiencies in a recent study.

Ideas of retrofitting the dam and using it for hydroelectric power were deemed too expensive. Other ideas involving keeping the spillway or building a park in the area were not included in the final plan following citizen input and a change in funding.

Residents wanted the town to look the way it has for hundreds of years and didn’t care about the multi-million dollar project that taxpayers would need to fund to keep it, Brenenstuhl said.

The allure of keeping the river looking the way it does was thwarted by the tax increase that was presented before the June 10 vote, Brenenstuhl said.

The $9 million price tag would have been spread out across 25 years, with a 5 percent interest rate, putting the project cost at $14,107,600, including the $5,107,600 in interest. The projected annual cost would be $664,000.

That aligns with the town’s estimation last year that the retention and repairs would cost $6-8 million. The cost rose to $9 million because of inflation and changes in the plan, Brenenstuhl said.

Mallett, 78, was one of the residents who voted to keep the dam twice despite the tax increase. He said his vote was based on his emotions and the dam’s connection to the town’s history.

The loss of floatplane landings, boating areas and historical views are going to affect the town’s culture for the worse, Mallett said.

Removing the dam won’t just change how the town looks, but it will also change how the water flows.

Jared Atkinson, an avid boater and fisherman from Dover-Foxcroft, said he voted to keep the dam in both elections because he wants to continue to enjoy the Piscataquis River.

“I understand, taxes will go up, but in my opinion, it’s worth keeping the water the way it is,” Atkinson said.

The dam has kept water levels west of town fairly level, but multiple residents said the river isn’t raging. Water levels are already low, with Atkinson saying he cannot get a canoe down the river on some summer days.

The demolition could make the riverbed muddier or less usable, multiple residents fear.

The water levels will decrease after the dam’s removal, but so will flood risks, Brenenstuhl said. The demolition will also include silt removal that may free up the riverbed, making the river flow more freely and allowing citizens like Atkinson to still use the water.

With the lower water line that comes with the demolition, new vegetation will grow on the river banks and sea-run fish will have a chance to make it upstream with the dam out of the way.

The town will work with the Nature Conservancy and Atlantic Salmon Federation to start planning the demolition, Brenenstuhl said. The organizations are helping the town write grants and receive funding for the demolition.

A start date for the demolition has not been set, but it will not begin this year. The first step of the process is removing a v-shaped notch from the dam to allow more water to flow and prepare the banks and vegetation for the demolition.

The demolition process will take two years.